Comments on: What Christians Care About http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html NIGHTTIME IS FOR DREAMING. DAYLIGHT IS FOR ACTION. Wed, 7 Jan 2009 01:29:21 +0000 By: Ebonmuse http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8483 Ebonmuse Fri, 20 Oct 2006 04:29:11 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8483 <blockquote>There are lots of rumors of the Republicans supporting the Greens in 2000 in order to deprive the Democratic Party of votes, and given the Rovians' record of Machiavellianism, I would not be one bit surprised.</blockquote> Relying on rumors isn't necessary. They did exactly the same thing this year (or tried to, anyway), funding and supporting the Green Party in Pennsylvania in an attempt to split the Democratic vote for Senate. The Green candidate, Carl Romanelli, got 100% of his campaign donations from Republicans, and staffers working for Rick Santorum went out to collect signatures on his behalf. Fortunately, Romanelli was disqualified when it turned out that many of the signatures collected for him were spurious. (See <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=green+party+pennsylvania+site:www.dailykos.com">these posts</a> from Daily Kos chronicling the affair.)

There are lots of rumors of the Republicans supporting the Greens in 2000 in order to deprive the Democratic Party of votes, and given the Rovians' record of Machiavellianism, I would not be one bit surprised.

Relying on rumors isn't necessary. They did exactly the same thing this year (or tried to, anyway), funding and supporting the Green Party in Pennsylvania in an attempt to split the Democratic vote for Senate. The Green candidate, Carl Romanelli, got 100% of his campaign donations from Republicans, and staffers working for Rick Santorum went out to collect signatures on his behalf. Fortunately, Romanelli was disqualified when it turned out that many of the signatures collected for him were spurious. (See these posts from Daily Kos chronicling the affair.)

]]> By: lpetrich http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8482 lpetrich Fri, 20 Oct 2006 04:12:50 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8482 So some Xian fundies are trying to pose as the only reasonable alternative to Muslim fundies? A plague on both their houses is my response. They seem too much alike for my taste. And that Open Letter to James Dobson got a response on its page to the effect that setting up a "Christian party" would mean electoral doom, because it would take votes away from the Republican Party. This is a side effect of the usual voting system used, first-past-the-post or plurality voting. That is, one vote and that's it. That works OK when there are only two candidates, but is the worst possible system for more than two. This is because it makes a vote for any other than the two biggest candidates very likely a wasted vote, one that helps one's least favorite of the two major ones. There are lots of rumors of the Republicans supporting the Greens in 2000 in order to deprive the Democratic Party of votes, and given the Rovians' record of Machiavellianism, I would not be one bit surprised. There are lots of alternative systems, several of which have been used in other nations and by various organizations. The main ones for single-seat races are: * Approval voting. Like plurality voting, but it's possible to vote for more than one candidate. * Preference voting. One ranks the candidates by preference; these preference rankings are combined to find an overall preference ranking using any of various algorithms (Borda, Condorcet, Instant Runoff). For multi-seat races, like for multi-seat House delegations, one can have proportional representation. In the commonly-used party-list system, each party gets votes in proportion to how many votes it had received. The states could adopt this proportional approach in order to select their electors for the Electoral College, thus making the electoral vote closely approximate the popular vote and forcing candidates to concentrate on all states and not just a few "battleground" states. So some Xian fundies are trying to pose as the only reasonable alternative to Muslim fundies? A plague on both their houses is my response. They seem too much alike for my taste.

And that Open Letter to James Dobson got a response on its page to the effect that setting up a "Christian party" would mean electoral doom, because it would take votes away from the Republican Party.

This is a side effect of the usual voting system used, first-past-the-post or plurality voting. That is, one vote and that's it. That works OK when there are only two candidates, but is the worst possible system for more than two. This is because it makes a vote for any other than the two biggest candidates very likely a wasted vote, one that helps one's least favorite of the two major ones. There are lots of rumors of the Republicans supporting the Greens in 2000 in order to deprive the Democratic Party of votes, and given the Rovians' record of Machiavellianism, I would not be one bit surprised.

There are lots of alternative systems, several of which have been used in other nations and by various organizations. The main ones for single-seat races are:

* Approval voting. Like plurality voting, but it's possible to vote for more than one candidate.

* Preference voting. One ranks the candidates by preference; these preference rankings are combined to find an overall preference ranking using any of various algorithms (Borda, Condorcet, Instant Runoff).

For multi-seat races, like for multi-seat House delegations, one can have proportional representation. In the commonly-used party-list system, each party gets votes in proportion to how many votes it had received. The states could adopt this proportional approach in order to select their electors for the Electoral College, thus making the electoral vote closely approximate the popular vote and forcing candidates to concentrate on all states and not just a few "battleground" states.

]]> By: Ebonmuse http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8472 Ebonmuse Fri, 20 Oct 2006 00:27:55 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8472 Mikidu raises a valid point, but it is not, I think, one that applies to us. The people who have to worry about the scenario he describes are evangelical Christians who think they can avert the threat posed by Islam by converting enough people. It's certainly true that people who are susceptible to one superstition will tend to be susceptible to others, so that war is likely to be an endless stalemate, with people converting between both sides regularly but never shifting the overall balance. But we atheists are not, I hope, just attacking religion piecemeal, one belief system at a time. Instead, we should be teaching people to reason and to think critically, grounding them in rational skepticism that can be applied to every unjustified belief alike. If we succeed at doing that, then when we free one person from a particular religion, we'll have immunized them against all other religions as well. Mikidu raises a valid point, but it is not, I think, one that applies to us. The people who have to worry about the scenario he describes are evangelical Christians who think they can avert the threat posed by Islam by converting enough people. It's certainly true that people who are susceptible to one superstition will tend to be susceptible to others, so that war is likely to be an endless stalemate, with people converting between both sides regularly but never shifting the overall balance. But we atheists are not, I hope, just attacking religion piecemeal, one belief system at a time. Instead, we should be teaching people to reason and to think critically, grounding them in rational skepticism that can be applied to every unjustified belief alike. If we succeed at doing that, then when we free one person from a particular religion, we'll have immunized them against all other religions as well.

]]> By: lpetrich http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8444 lpetrich Thu, 19 Oct 2006 15:17:52 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8444 And the really remarkable thing is what sinners they call themselves, how deserving of eternal damnation they claim to be. They then turn around and act like the Gospels' caricature of Pharisees, absolutely convinced of their moral perfection. And guess what recently came out: David Kuo's book <i>Tempting Faith: An Inside Story of Political Seduction</i>. It describes how the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives was using the Religious Right as a way of mobilizing Republican votes. Not only did it fail to deliver on billions of dollars of promised funding, White House strategists would routinely dismiss RR leaders behind their backs as "ridiculous" and "out of control" and "goofy," calling them "the nuts." Niccolo Machiavelli would have understood <i>very</i> well -- he recommended that political leaders <i>seem</i> religious and virtuous and so forth, even as they shamelessly do whatever crooked things they need to in order to get power and retain it. And the really remarkable thing is what sinners they call themselves, how deserving of eternal damnation they claim to be. They then turn around and act like the Gospels' caricature of Pharisees, absolutely convinced of their moral perfection.

And guess what recently came out: David Kuo's book Tempting Faith: An Inside Story of Political Seduction. It describes how the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives was using the Religious Right as a way of mobilizing Republican votes. Not only did it fail to deliver on billions of dollars of promised funding, White House strategists would routinely dismiss RR leaders behind their backs as "ridiculous" and "out of control" and "goofy," calling them "the nuts."

Niccolo Machiavelli would have understood very well -- he recommended that political leaders seem religious and virtuous and so forth, even as they shamelessly do whatever crooked things they need to in order to get power and retain it.

]]> By: Mikidu http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8421 Mikidu Thu, 19 Oct 2006 04:13:29 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8421 To Crazy Non-believer. I think you have identified a valid concern. The more we attack and weaken Christianity, the more fertile ground becomes available for another religion, such as Islam, to move in on their territory . Given a choice of the two, I think Islam is more undesirable than Christianity. Even George Bush's good buddy Ted Haggard has expressed concern about the Islamification of Europe as the next major threat. I believe we should all concentrate less on attacking specific religious beliefs and direct our attention to the God concept in general as Richard Dawkins does. If through public education we can show the God concept itself is irrational, then we are effectively dealing with all religious beliefs at the same time. To Crazy Non-believer.
I think you have identified a valid concern. The more we attack and weaken Christianity, the more fertile ground becomes available for another religion, such as Islam, to move in on their territory . Given a choice of the two, I think Islam is more undesirable than Christianity. Even George Bush's good buddy Ted Haggard has expressed concern about the Islamification of Europe as the next major threat. I believe we should all concentrate less on attacking specific religious beliefs and direct our attention to the God concept in general as Richard Dawkins does. If through public education we can show the God concept itself is irrational, then we are effectively dealing with all religious beliefs at the same time.

]]> By: Crazy Non-Believer http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8409 Crazy Non-Believer Wed, 18 Oct 2006 23:56:15 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8409 It's fine that we all agree with the article. But what do we few do about the spread of Islamicism throughout Europe and the rest of the world that will apparently within a decade become the majority? In my opinion, we can't fight blind faith with blind faith. But then what do we do? It's fine that we all agree with the article. But what do we few do about the spread of Islamicism throughout Europe and the rest of the world that will apparently within a decade become the majority? In my opinion, we can't fight blind faith with blind faith. But then what do we do?

]]> By: my view http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8402 my view Wed, 18 Oct 2006 21:00:48 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8402 Does Belief in God Damage Society? By Ruth Gledhill, The Times UK Religious belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today. According to the study, belief in and worship of God are not only unnecessary for a healthy society but may actually contribute to social problems. The study counters the view of believers that religion is necessary to provide the moral and ethical foundations of a healthy society. It compares the social peformance of relatively secular countries, such as Britain, with the US, where the majority believes in a creator rather than the theory of evolution. Many conservative evangelicals in the US consider Darwinism to be a social evil, believing that it inspires atheism and amorality. Many liberal Christians and believers of other faiths hold that religious belief is socially beneficial, believing that it helps to lower rates of violent crime, murder, suicide, sexual promiscuity and abortion. The benefits of religious belief to a society have been described as its “spiritual capital”. But the study claims that the devotion of many in the US may actually contribute to its ills. The paper, published in the Journal of Religion and Society, a US academic journal, reports: “Many Americans agree that their churchgoing nation is an exceptional, God-blessed, shining city on the hill that stands as an impressive example for an increasingly sceptical world. “In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion in the prosperous democracies. “The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developing democracies, sometimes spectacularly so.” Gregory Paul, the author of the study and a social scientist, used data from the International Social Survey Programme, Gallup and other research bodies to reach his conclusions. He compared social indicators such as murder rates, abortion, suicide and teenage pregnancy. The study concluded that the US was the world’s only prosperous democracy where murder rates were still high, and that the least devout nations were the least dysfunctional. Mr Paul said that rates of gonorrhoea in adolescents in the US were up to 300 times higher than in less devout democratic countries. The US also suffered from “ uniquely high” adolescent and adult syphilis infection rates, and adolescent abortion rates, the study suggested. Mr Paul said: “The study shows that England, despite the social ills it has, is actually performing a good deal better than the USA in most indicators, even though it is now a much less religious nation than America.” He said that the disparity was even greater when the US was compared with other countries, including France, Japan and the Scandinavian countries. These nations had been the most successful in reducing murder rates, early mortality, sexually transmitted diseases and abortion, he added. Mr Paul delayed releasing the study until now because of Hurricane Katrina. He said that the evidence accumulated by a number of different studies suggested that religion might actually contribute to social ills. “I suspect that Europeans are increasingly repelled by the poor societal performance of the Christian states,” he added. He said that most Western nations would become more religious only if the theory of evolution could be overturned and the existence of God scientifically proven. Likewise, the theory of evolution would not enjoy majority support in the US unless there was a marked decline in religious belief, Mr Paul said. “The non-religious, proevolution democracies contradict the dictum that a society cannot enjoy good conditions unless most citizens ardently believe in a moral creator. “The widely held fear that a Godless citizenry must experience societal disaster is therefore refuted.” Source: The Times UK Does Belief in God Damage Society?

By Ruth Gledhill,
The Times UK

Religious belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today.

According to the study, belief in and worship of God are not only unnecessary for a healthy society but may actually contribute to social problems.

The study counters the view of believers that religion is necessary to provide the moral and ethical foundations of a healthy society.

It compares the social peformance of relatively secular countries, such as Britain, with the US, where the majority believes in a creator rather than the theory of evolution. Many conservative evangelicals in the US consider Darwinism to be a social evil, believing that it inspires atheism and amorality.

Many liberal Christians and believers of other faiths hold that religious belief is socially beneficial, believing that it helps to lower rates of violent crime, murder, suicide, sexual promiscuity and abortion. The benefits of religious belief to a society have been described as its “spiritual capital”. But the study claims that the devotion of many in the US may actually contribute to its ills.

The paper, published in the Journal of Religion and Society, a US academic journal, reports: “Many Americans agree that their churchgoing nation is an exceptional, God-blessed, shining city on the hill that stands as an impressive example for an increasingly sceptical world.

“In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion in the prosperous democracies.

“The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developing democracies, sometimes spectacularly so.”

Gregory Paul, the author of the study and a social scientist, used data from the International Social Survey Programme, Gallup and other research bodies to reach his conclusions.

He compared social indicators such as murder rates, abortion, suicide and teenage pregnancy.

The study concluded that the US was the world’s only prosperous democracy where murder rates were still high, and that the least devout nations were the least dysfunctional. Mr Paul said that rates of gonorrhoea in adolescents in the US were up to 300 times higher than in less devout democratic countries. The US also suffered from “ uniquely high” adolescent and adult syphilis infection rates, and adolescent abortion rates, the study suggested.

Mr Paul said: “The study shows that England, despite the social ills it has, is actually performing a good deal better than the USA in most indicators, even though it is now a much less religious nation than America.”

He said that the disparity was even greater when the US was compared with other countries, including France, Japan and the Scandinavian countries. These nations had been the most successful in reducing murder rates, early mortality, sexually transmitted diseases and abortion, he added.

Mr Paul delayed releasing the study until now because of Hurricane Katrina. He said that the evidence accumulated by a number of different studies suggested that religion might actually contribute to social ills. “I suspect that Europeans are increasingly repelled by the poor societal performance of the Christian states,” he added.

He said that most Western nations would become more religious only if the theory of evolution could be overturned and the existence of God scientifically proven. Likewise, the theory of evolution would not enjoy majority support in the US unless there was a marked decline in religious belief, Mr Paul said.

“The non-religious, proevolution democracies contradict the dictum that a society cannot enjoy good conditions unless most citizens ardently believe in a moral creator.

“The widely held fear that a Godless citizenry must experience societal disaster is therefore refuted.”

Source: The Times UK

]]> By: Christopher http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8401 Christopher Wed, 18 Oct 2006 20:36:21 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8401 Even though most of the U.S. population today is christian, they are dwindling in number. At present, less than 5% of people under the age of 21 believe in their nonsense (hellfire preachers have been screaming this little factiod for about 3 years now, hoping to scare parents into sending their kids to bible camps for indoctrination). They are losing the war for their existence and they know it! They are a religion of middle-aged couples and old fogies that fear change; their days as a political force to be reckoned with are coming to a close. Let them stare into the abyss that is their future (who knows, it might even stare back and give them a new outlook of themselves). Even though most of the U.S. population today is christian, they are dwindling in number. At present, less than 5% of people under the age of 21 believe in their nonsense (hellfire preachers have been screaming this little factiod for about 3 years now, hoping to scare parents into sending their kids to bible camps for indoctrination). They are losing the war for their existence and they know it!

They are a religion of middle-aged couples and old fogies that fear change; their days as a political force to be reckoned with are coming to a close. Let them stare into the abyss that is their future (who knows, it might even stare back and give them a new outlook of themselves).

]]> By: corsair the rational pirate http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8388 corsair the rational pirate Wed, 18 Oct 2006 13:31:22 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8388 Clap clap clap! Great read! Clap clap clap!

Great read!

]]> By: O. Wolcott http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8372 O. Wolcott Wed, 18 Oct 2006 04:11:06 +0000 http://www.daylightatheism.org/2006/10/what-christians-care-about.html#comment-8372 Thanks, I seem to have overlooked that. Much appreciated Interested Atheist. Thanks, I seem to have overlooked that. Much appreciated Interested Atheist.

]]>